re: David O. Russell has quite the cast assembled for his next film...

quote:

---

Throw you in with southdowns as two fricking idiots if you seriously don't think I'm right.

---

Woa, where did I say you were wrong?

It was just low IQ observation.

quote:

---

I can name literally a million movies with better casts than that one

---

This is what makes it a low IQ observation dum dum.

ETA: it’s still a good cast.

I equate David O. Russell with Cameron Crowe. Equally capable of making genius movies and mediocre fare. Major stars want to work with them, and they write most of their own stuff. I'm always intrigued by what they are doing next.

quote:

---

When you're selling a movie based on the cast and cast alone that isn't a good sign.

---

That isn't always true. There are numerous examples throughout the history of Hollywood that prove otherwise.

quote:

---

There are numerous examples throughout the history of Hollywood that prove otherwise.

---

Where they touted the great cast, but gave no clue about what the movie was even about? What are the numerous examples throughout history of this happening?

Sure there are plenty of movies that pushed the cast up front over the story. but i can't think of many sold on cast alone.

quote:

---

Where they touted the great cast, but gave no clue about what the movie was even about? What are the numerous examples throughout history of this happening?

Sure there are plenty of movies that pushed the cast up front over the story. but i can't think of many sold on cast alone.

---

You're complaining about this in a thread about David O. Russell... the director who had Robert De Niro in American Hustle but didn't announce it beforehand, and let De Niro go uncredited, just so the audience would have a heightened experience when he appeared on screen as the menacing mobster.

David O. Russell has his faults, but it's amazing how people in this thread are constructing false histories to drag him down. Just tell us what you don't like about his films. Don't create bullshite.

quote:

---

Where they touted the great cast, but gave no clue about what the movie was even about? What are the numerous examples throughout history of this happening?

---

Inception is one movie that jumps out at me. Nolan kept the plot secret surrounding that movie until after the first teaser trailer was released.

quote:

---

When you're selling a movie based on the cast and cast alone that isn't a good sign.

---

They aren’t “selling” the movie yet. This wasn’t a trailer or anything, simply an article outlining the loaded cast on the production

quote:

---

A lot of really bad Oscar bait and Cash grabs have come from great ensemble cast with a shite plot.

---

There’s also been a ton of great movies with deep ensemble casts so I don’t really see your point.

quote:

---

Like Movie 43?

---

This is the one you're calling a "cash grab or Oscar bait"? A movie made on a tiny budget by an independent studio and distributed by a small company? A movie that was made virtually in secret, and never had any cast announcements before being filmed because it was filmed in small chunks over several years? A movie that received almost no marketing before being dumped into a few hundred theaters in January? A movie that could not be marketed based on plot considering it's comprised of a dozen or so vignettes that are all unrelated?

Movie 43 is bad, yes. It has absolutely nothing in common with this new David O. Russell film. If Russell delivers a film of vignettes, it will have one thing in common with Movie 43, but that's a pretty unlikely scenario.

I just don't know that you could have picked a worse example to defend your position.